Ming Thein
wrote:
...I run four different systems, and am an NPS member?

I work with Leica because they recognize that whilst exclusivity is great for marketing, it isn't so great for credibility. There are times I prefer to use my Nikons, or my M4/3 gear, or something else, and times I use the Leicas. I use the best tool for the job - the final yardstick for me is client delivery, not who sponsors the cameras (if at all).

Daedalus2000
wrote:

How can you say that you are brand agnostic when your signature says "Leica Camera brand ambassador"?

Very nice review by the way.

D

Ming Thein
wrote:

I run four systems. If it's a spade, I'll call it a spade - I'll use the best tool for the job, regardless of whatever it is.

I didn't think the X1 was useable for street work because it was a) slow to focus; b) slow to manually focus; c) battery didn't last long; d) sensor wasn't good enough to stop down all the way and guestimate distances - the distance indicator/ DOF scales are nowhere near as good as what you get on a say an M lens. The X2 is much better because of a combination of flip up EVF, focusing speed, and sensor.

You're talking about saggital coma, I think. I still see it on the X2 - it's the same lens.

janlu
wrote:

very nice review and pleasant reading...... I also appreciate your sincerity as Leica ambassador in stating that the lens doesn't perform so well at F2.8 with the new sensor.... This X2 is for sure an improved X1, but i can't see in it a big step since i have never found my X1 unusable .

On the night shot wide-open on the X1 i have always noted a decentered Halo around the lights to sides of the frame ...not in the center though , ( i.e. street-lamps etc...) ..... do you experienced it with the X2 .... the lens is supposed to be exactly the same... .. or not ?

Great review, excellent pictures. Like a breadth of fresh air a camera review made by an actual photographer and not a gear head

So, it seems that the usability is finally there - i.e. The camera does not hinder the photographic exoerience in any way, unlike the x1 which had terribly slow af. Would you say this camera can be used for street photography?

I know you said you found the x100 intolerable in its slowness and quirky operation. Are you talking about the x100 when it was first launched, or with the newer 1.20 firmware? I have one and the af speed seems pretty decent and very accurate with latest firmware - comparable to a panasonic gf1 maybe, maybe a tad faster, all i can say is that af doensn't seem like a major problem now. The camera still has weird quirks like occassional hangups or slow startup, now THOSE are irritanting. Would you say the x2 is better rounded than the x100 with regards to general usability and operation?

…care to elaborate how you know that the Canon is "better in every way"…!?

Wellington100
wrote:

You are being very generous about a camera that for its price point should excel or at the very least equal the competition. Leica is known for premium products at premium prices.

This camera has not kept up to date with the state of play in the premium compact sector. In some ways it is already three years out of date. Why on earth would anyone buy it when the Canon G1X is available for far less money and is better in every way.

I hope Leica have something else up their sleeves, this camera is a non event.
--

According to Camera Size.com (
http://camerasize.com/compare/#133,322
) - the X2 is almost 13oz (12.7oz) with battery/card etc. The Fuji X100 is 15.7oz similarly equipped. Stripped or not - the X100 is only a bare 2oz heavier than X2. Both are relative lightweights.

Also -
Where do you get your sub 11oz measurement from
? Even Leica specs state it's above 11oz even in it's body only form ...

As for the 50% more volume claim .... I don't know by which math you calculate 'volume' - or even what this term actually means - but the X100 dimensions are never greater than 2.5% - 5.0% overall so this seems very unlikely too ....

photo perzon
wrote:

The X2 is really the best under 11 ounce camera out there now. The Fuji X100 is 16 ounces, and 50% more volume. The X200 is twice the volume, it is larger than a Nikon D5100 in its frontal area.

While the handier Fuji X or Oly OM-D were just a vague whimsical desire at first, I now dream of Leica; of course, for the brand name itself and the obvious craftsmanship it entails (who wouldn't, in all honesty?), but also for the immodest qualities of its lens and for the rare subtlety of its color processor, all that via a creativity-inducing streamlined interface.

Moreover, glad to read that the AF and sensor have been greatly improved upon from the X1 days, yet hoping that the unbelievable 3D-like images of said predecessor will remain (!?)